It's no accident that Linus Torvalds has been calling the shots for Linux longer than most world leaders have been in power. In the 12 years since he uploaded his operating system and became de facto master of the open source universe, the 33-year-old programmer has endured waves of attacks from developer zealots seeking to hijack open source to further their own agendas - toppling Microsoft, fighting the music industry, stopping the commercialization of open source software. Through it all, Torvalds has maintained a Zen-like ability to defuse political opposition and saved Linux from being either co-opted or abandoned. Torvalds, who holds down a day job as a software engineer at chipmaker Transmeta, told Wired how he keeps the peace.

WIRED: The open source community has all manner of rabid devotees. What's your strategy for keeping these forces at bay?TORVALDS: My basic strategy has always been to not care too much. It actually ends up working wonders - avoiding confrontation by just walking away. The thing is, I don't usually feel as deeply about some of the issues they feel strongly about, and that makes it easier just to ignore the politics - and as a result, the political consequences. That also allows me to concentrate on the things I do enjoy, namely the technical discussions.

How long will that work?Well, it's worked so far. Every once in a while an issue comes up where I have to make a statement. I can't totally avoid all political issues, but I try my best to minimize them. When I do make a statement, I try to be fairly neutral. Again, that comes from me caring a lot more about the technology than about the politics, and that usually means that my opinions are colored mostly by what I think is the right thing to do technically rather than for some nebulous good.

You got royally flamed for a recent statement on Slashdot.org in which you defended digital rights management, which is hated by many in the open source community because it allows hardware to lock out some applications. Why did you stick your neck out?I rewrote that post three times. I expected to offend some people, but I wanted to make sure I was fairly noninflammatory. I used humor and tried not to make it a black and white thing.

You basically said you're OK with DRM. What effect will that have? The whole point of that post was to set developer expectations right. We've allowed a lot of the technology that DRM requires for a long while already, but from my discussions with some kernel developers, it was clear that not everybody was on the same page as to what that meant for Linux. To avoid future clashes and disappointment, I would much rather bring the issue into the open and make sure people know about it. That way developers can make up their own minds about whether they want to work on a system that may someday be used in ways they don't agree with.

Have you lost any sleep over the DRM flamefest?I lose sleep if I end up feeling bad about something I've said. Usually that happens when I send something out without having read it over a few times, or when I call somebody names. I like being on friendly terms with most people. This time it's been a fairly amicable discussion. I expected much worse.

Most leaders expend a lot of energy trying to stay in power. What do you do to maintain support?To me, the most important part has always been a certain aura of neutrality. By staying neutral, I end up being somebody that everybody can trust. Even if they don't always agree with my decisions, they know I'm not working against them. People know that when I make a technical decision, it's not politically motivated. Obviously, I also try to maintain support by just being good at what I do.

Don't you run the risk of alienating supporters out on the fringes?Part of my job is managing expectations. I have a nagging fear that someone will come up to me years from now and say, "I gave you the best five years of my life, and look what you've let Linux become."

You seem pretty thick-skinned and even-keeled. Do you ever doubt yourself?Not really. But I think part of that is because I'm fairly comfortable with the notion of saying "Sorry, I was wrong," even in public. Another way of putting it: I don't have to doubt myself, because to some degree I don't have to care whether I'm right or wrong. If I'm right, I'm right, and if I'm wrong we can go back and fix it. The only thing you generally can't go back and fix later on is that small detail of trust, which is another reason I'd rather bring these things out in the open, so that people know what I think.

You've said that you're "just an engineer." What do you mean by that?I wear that as a badge of honor. I think of myself as an engineer, not as a visionary or "big thinker." I don't have any lofty goals. I just want to have fun making the best damn operating system I can.

David Diamond (ddiamond@well.com) wrote about Philippine labor exports in Wired 10.06. He's the coauthor, with Torvalds, of Just For Fun: The Story of an Accidental Revolutionary.